Strasbourg, 19 May 2000 T-PVS (2000) 26 [tpvs26e_2000.doc] CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF EUROPEAN WILDLIFE AND NATURAL HABITATS Group of Experts on Conservation of Invertebrates 6th meeting Neuchâtel (Switzerland), 13 May 2000 REPORT OF THE MEETING Secrétariat Memorandum prepared by the Directorate of Sustainable Development __________________________________________________________ This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. Ce document ne sera plus distribué en réunion. Prière de vous munir de cet exemplaire. T-PVS (2000) 26 - 2 – The Group of Experts on the Conservation of Invertebrates held its 6th meeting in Neuchâtel (Switzerland) on 13 May 2000, in accordance with the terms of reference set up by the Standing Committee. The Standing Committee is invited to : 1. thank the Swiss conservation authorities, the Canton of Neuchâtel and the City of Neuchâtel for the material support for the meeting ; thank the Swiss Centre for Cartography of Fauna for the excellent preparation of the meeting ; 2. take note of the report of the meeting ; 3. examine and, in appropriate, adopt the draft recommendation enclosed on Action Plan for Margaritifera margaritifera (Appendix 4) and and Action Plan for Margaritifera auricularia (Appendix 5) ; 4. when taken decisions on the programme and budget for 2001 to 2003, take into account the following activities : - Strategy on Invertebrate Convservation in Europe ; - Red Book on Odonata ; - Strengthening of Bern Convention website with invertebrate information ; - European Project on conservation of Margaritifera margaritifera ; 5. when deciding on the future of this group, take into account a possible co-ordination with other initiatives on invertebrate conservation, such as the European Invertebrate Survey, which might be asked to play a future role in assessing the Convention on invertebrate issues. - 3 - T-PVS (2000) 26 1. Opening of the meeting by the Chair The Chair of the Group, Mr Anastasios Legakis (Greece), welcomed participants, noted that it was 10 years since the Group first met and opened the meeting. A list of participants appears in Appendix 1 to this document. 2. Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted as it figures in Appendix 2 to this document. 3. Secretariat Report The Secretariat informed the Group that the Standing Committee to the Convention had adopted in December 1998 its Recommendation No. 65 on the conservation of Maculinea butterflies, as suggested by the Group. In addition, the Standing Committee had agreed to include in its programme of activities the extension to Southern and Eastern Europe of the study on invertebrates canditates for Appendix II of the Convention and the Action Plans for Margaritifera margaritifera and Margaritifera auricularia. Another work that was finished was the Red Book of Rhopalocera. All these three reports were to be discussed later in the agenda. The Standing Committee had also taken the suggestion of the Group to review activities concerning marine biodiversity, another subject proposed by the Group. The Committee examined in December 1999 the report presented by the consultant, Mr Costello, but wanted the report to be revised before any further decision. The main purpose of the report is to analyse what activities on conservation of marine life are being carried out by other international initiatives and conventions so as to define a possible role for the Bern Convention on the conservation of marine life. The Secretariat also informed the Committee on the progress in the setting-up of the Emerald Network, notably by the completion of pilot projects in Bulgaria, Slovenia and Russia in 1999. In year 1999 and 2000, pilot projects have started in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Turkey and Slovakia. Moldova and Romania are to start projects in year 2000 so that 11 non-EU states are already deeply involved in the exercise. In EU the Natura 2000 Network is also progressing fast, so that many areas are being targeted for conservation as a result of having Bern Convention invertebrates, quite good news. At the Council of Europe a process of prioritisation of activites has meant that the Organisation will concentrate on political and human rights issues, which may mean a certain downsizing of action in the field of environment. This means that the Bern Convention will have to work more efficiently, looking for external partners that may wish to collaborate with the Council of Europe in keeping a meaningful environment sector. For the Group of Experts this meant that the regularity of its meetings (every two years) would be examined by the Standing Committee. It was likely that the Group was only to meet on an ad hoc basis or in co-operation with other organisations. A discussion on the future of the Group is to be held in point 9 of the agenda. 4. Progress in invertebrates conservation since the last meeting The delegates of Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Moldova, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom presented their reports, that of Belgium concerning only the Walloon Region. These national reports are presented in Appendix 3 to this document. T-PVS (2000) 26 - 4 – The Chairman summarised the reports as follows : - there had been in the last two years an increase in action towards conservation of invertebrates, both in the implementation of action plans and in the establishment of protected areas in Europe, this in particular focussed on the setting-up of the Natura 2000 Network and – more recently – in the Emerald Network ; - much work was being done in states that are candidates to the accession of the European Union ; - research on invertebrates seemed to be progressing well, thanks in particular to well- established institutions (universities, museums and specialised institutes or centres) and to the active involvement of amateurs ; - in most European states, governments and scientists was building at the national level a strong co-operation on invertebrate issues ; - there was lack of international collaboration, such as the one facilitated by the group. That would be a reason to try to make the group more active and look for its survival in whatever appropriate form ; - new technologies, and particularly Internet, were changing the way in which information was being communicated on invertebrate issues. The Group should try to use the Council of Europe website to enhance its activities. 5. Action Plans for Margaritifera margaritifera and Margaritifera auricularia – Water quality standards related to the presence of Margaritifera margaritifera [documents T-PVS (2000) 9, T-PVS (2000) 10, T-PVS/Invertebrates (2000) 2] Both Action Plans were presented by the experts, Mr Rafael Araujo and Mrs Marian Ramos. The Group welcomed the Action Plans, which were very much needed, raised their quality and wished that they be circulated for comment before their final version. The representative of France informed the Committee on the survey of Margaritifera auricularia carried out in France, which had produced positive results for 5 rivers. The Group recommended the governments of Spain and France to co-ordinate a common conservation initiative for the species, which is probably the most threatened mollusc in Europe. EU LIFE programme was mentioned as a possible funding source. The Group instructed the Secretariat to prepare a Draft recommendation along the same lines as Recommendation No. 65 (see Draft recommendation in Appendix 4 to this document). Discussing Margaritifera margaritifera, the Group noted that there was no protocol for carrying out standarised surveys for the species. The Group asked the Secretariat to prepare another draft recommendation for Margaritifera margaritifera insisting in particular in the need of international collaboration (Draft recommendation in Appendix 5 to this document). - 5 - T-PVS (2000) 26 Water standards allowing the development of Margaritifera margaritifera populations Mr Speight presented a document pointing out the usefulness of Margaritifera margaritifera for improving water quality by may of their filtering action. He suggested that, as Margaritifera margaritifera was extremely sensitive to water pollution, a new water quality standard be established for Europe, one that takes into account the needs of this species and other aquatic organisms. The Secretariat provided to circulate the paper to concerned governments for comment. Regarding a proposal to co-ordinate a project on conservation of Margaritifera margaritifera in Europe the Secretariat informed the Committee that, in the present circumstances, the Bern Convention Secretariat was in no position to co-ordinate such project, however interesting. 6. Red Data Book on Butterflies (Rhopalocera) Mr Chris van Swaay presented this report (published in Council of Europe Nature and Environment Series No. 100). The Group expressed its satisfaction for the completion of this very useful book and wished that the same approach be used for other groups. 7. European Red Lists of Invertebrates [document T-PVS (99) 41] The Secretariat presented the document, which had been compiled by Professor Balletto. The Secretariat reminded the Group that the study was to complement the report compiled by Mr John Haslett (document T-PVS (98) 9) so a list of potential candidates for the Convention and, eventually, for the Habitats Directive – might be screemed. The idea was to have available information on threatened